planner: Support tablescan elimination for indexmerge

[King-Dylan]

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #51584

Problem Summary: For an index merge plan involving intersections, we can eliminate table lookups, thereby improving SQL execution performance.

What changed and how does it work?

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• No need to test

  • I checked and no code files have been changed.

Side effects

• Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
• Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
• Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

• Affects user behaviors
• Contains syntax changes
• Contains variable changes
• Contains experimental features
• Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

Support tablescan elimination for indexmerge

[ti-chi-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign time-and-fate for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS
• pkg/planner/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[ti-chi-bot]

Hi @King-Dylan. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a pingcap member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[tiprow]

Hi @King-Dylan. Thanks for your PR.

PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test all.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[bb7133]

/ok-to-test

[tiprow]

@King-Dylan: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
fast_test_tiprow	1a88b8e	link	true	/test fast_test_tiprow

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 68.35443% with 150 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.5389%. Comparing base (80d6b56) to head (e0e6bca).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##             master     #60136        +/-   ##
================================================
+ Coverage   73.1532%   73.5389%   +0.3856%     
================================================
  Files          1707       1708         +1     
  Lines        471640     472229       +589     
================================================
+ Hits         345020     347272      +2252     
+ Misses       105441     103753      -1688     
- Partials      21179      21204        +25     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	42.9378% <68.3544%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Components	Coverage Δ
dumpling	52.6910% <ø> (∅)
parser	∅ <ø> (∅)
br	47.1813% <ø> (-0.8802%)	⬇️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[King-Dylan]

/retest

[bb7133]

/retest